Both agnostics and local-flood advocates have often pointed out this fact to those who hold the universal-flood view. Dr. Russell L. Mixter, professor of zoology at Wheaton College, argues against the universal flood view:
If kangaroos were in the ark and first touched land in Asia, one would expect fossils of them in Asia. According to Romer, the only place where there are either fossil or living kangaroos is in Australia. What shall we conclude? If the fossil evidence means that there never have been kangaroos in Asia, then kangaroos were not in the ark or if they were, they hurried from Australia to meet Noah, and as rapidly returned to their native land. Is it not easier to believe that they were never in the ark, and hence were in an area untouched by the flood, and that the flood occurred only in the area inhabited by man? (Creation and Evolution, p. 15)
This objection, however, may be quickly refuted by pointing out the fact that fossils are only formed under unusual conditions and that, apart from these conditions, all dead animals rapidly decompose and disappear. A number of examples support this:
There is no fossil evidence of lions in Palestine, but the Old Testament informs us that the land was once infested with these animals (see Judg 14:5; 1 Sam 17:34; 2 Sam 23:20; 1 Kgs 13:24; 20:36; 2 Kgs 17:25).
The Buffalo carcasses strewn over the plains in uncounted millions two generations ago have left hardly a present trace. The flesh was devoured by wolves and vultures within hours or days after death, and even the skeletons have now largely disappeared, the bones dissolving and crumbling into dust under the attack of the weather. (Carl Dunbar, Historical Geology, p. 39)